Remanded

Sanjay Tigga v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC2 Feb 2018B.A./8811/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Sessions Judge to amalgamate a second sessions trial instituted for the same offence and case, releasing the petitioner from custody in the duplicate proceeding as he was already on bail in the first trial.

What did the court decide?

Direction to amalgamate S.T. No. 66 of 2014 with S.T. No. 75 of 2014 and release the petitioner from custody in the duplicate proceeding.

Sanjay Tigga Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.8811 of 2017

Sanjay Tigga

..... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the State : A. P.P.

¶9

4/02.02.2018 The petitioner was granted bail in connection with S.T. No.75 of 2014, arising out of Kolebira P.S. Case No.20 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No.165 of 2008 (S), for the offence under Sections 395, 397, 412 of the Indian Penal Code, by order dated 06.5.2016 in B.A. No.3647 of 2016.

¶10

From the impugned order passed by the Court below in S.T. No.66 of 2014, it appears that the said S.T. No.66 of 2014 also arises out of the same case, i.e., Kolebira P.S. Case No.20 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No.165 of 2008.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is already facing the trial in S.T. No.75 of 2014, in which the prosecution witnesses are also being examined, but charge-sheet was also submitted against him separately, and the case was committed, and a separate sessions trial S.T. No.66 of 2014 had been instituted for the same offence as in S.T. No.75 of 2014. It is submitted that the petitioner had no knowledge of the said S.T. No.66 of 2014. The petitioner has now been taken in custody in connection with S.T. No.66 of 2014, and his bail application has been rejected by the Court below.

¶12

The learned Sessions Judge, Simdega, is directed to look into the matter and if, it is a fact that both the sessions cases are running for the same offence, arising out of the same case, the S.T. No.66 of 2014 shall be amalgamated with S.T. No.75 of 2014, in which, the petitioner has already been granted bail. The separate proceeding in the other sessions trial shall be dropped and the petitioner shall be released from custody.

¶13

Let this order be communicated to the learned Sessions Judge, Simdega, through FAX.

¶14

This bail application is disposed of with the direction as above.

¶15

(H. C. Mishra, J.)

¶16

R.Kumar

Sanjay Tigga v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Tigga v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratan Chandra Pramanik Vs Santosh Pramanik And Ors.

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Through The Manager Vs Sundhia Devi And Ors.

Raju Manjhi And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Umesh Prajapati Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Jwala Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rudra Narayan Bhakat Alias Rudra Bhakat Vs The State Of Jharkhand